Recently, social media has been abuzz with news about Culture Minister Mohammad Wissam Mortada’s removal of the Blue Shield emblem from the UNESCO World Heritage site of Baalbek, protected under the Hague Convention (1954), the Geneva Conventions (1949), and their Additional Protocols (1977). Although the emblem was removed in November 2023, the topic has resurfaced due to recent Israeli warnings to evacuate areas including Douris, Baalbek, and Ain Bourday. Heightened bombing activity in the Baalbek region has increased the risk of direct or indirect damage to the site.
What is the Cultural Property Protection Agreement, and Why is the Blue Shield Important?
Following World War II, UNESCO adopted the Hague Convention (1954), which established rules for protecting cultural property during armed conflicts. This convention was the first international treaty specifically dedicated to safeguarding cultural heritage during war, emphasizing the concept of humanity’s shared heritage. The convention was signed in The Hague, Netherlands, in 1954 and came into force in 1956, with more than one hundred countries now parties to it.
An international committee known as the International Committee of the Blue Shield (ICBS) was established as part of this agreement, with a mission to protect cultural property in times of conflict and crisis through training, advisory support, and raising awareness about the importance of cultural heritage. The Blue Shield’s efforts also include providing emergency assistance to threatened cultural sites, developing protection strategies, and supporting reconstruction and restoration efforts.
The committee also aims to build the capacities of local communities to protect their heritage, offering technical support for documenting cultural assets and assessing potential risks. In collaboration with international organizations such as UNESCO, the committee includes experts from diverse fields to provide effective solutions.
The convention designates a distinctive white and blue shield emblem, known as the Blue Shield, as a protective marker for cultural properties during armed conflict.
Lebanon signed the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and its First Protocol in 1960, and the Second Protocol in 2019. Although Israel is not currently a member of UNESCO, it is a signatory to the First Protocol of the Hague Convention, which binds it to comply with international standards for cultural heritage protection. Israel officially withdrew from UNESCO in 2018 following a long-standing dispute, particularly after Palestine was granted full membership in 2011, and UNESCO included several West Bank sites on the World Heritage List. Israel viewed these decisions as biased. The U.S. also withdrew in 2017, aligning with Israel.
Lebanon, the Blue Shield, and Enhanced Protection Under the Hague Convention
On November 18, 2024, UNESCO’s Special Protection Committee will hold a special session in response to a request from Lebanon’s UNESCO delegation, led by Ambassador Mustafa Adib. This meeting follows recent military escalation in Baalbek, including the latest bombing near the archaeological site’s parking area, which completely destroyed the historic Manshieh building and damaged several surrounding structures and landmarks.
The aim of the meeting is to request enhanced protection from UNESCO for Lebanese cultural sites facing heightened risks due to ongoing conflict. The Lebanese delegation will also advocate for intensified international efforts to protect these sites from escalating damage, especially those listed as World Heritage sites like Baalbek.
On the committee’s agenda is a request for enhanced protection for more than thirty archaeological sites located in areas at high risk of heavy shelling, particularly in South Lebanon, the Beqaa Valley, and Beirut. Lebanon’s Directorate General of Antiquities has prepared enhanced protection requests for UNESCO. However, due to a lack of transparency from relevant authorities, there is limited information available regarding the list of sites and the procedures for listing them under enhanced protection.
Enhanced protection under the Second Protocol of the Hague Convention allows for threatened sites to be placed on a provisional list, ensuring rigorous protection and establishing legal accountability for any violators. Sites granted enhanced protection benefit from a special commitment by member states to avoid exposing these sites to any form of harm during armed conflicts.
Enhanced Protection Requirements
To obtain enhanced protection, there are mandatory conditions set forth for conflict parties. The Lebanese government must underscore the importance of major cultural heritage sites to humanity, a criterion that applies to a large portion of Lebanon’s antiquities and cultural heritage. The government must also commit to safeguarding, maintaining, and reinforcing cultural properties through local measures to ensure their safety and sustainability. Lebanese authorities are further required to guarantee that these sites are not used for any military purposes.
Once these conditions are met, enhanced protection can be secured for various types of cultural property, both movable, such as art, artifacts, and manuscripts, and immovable, such as artistic, historical, or religious buildings, archaeological sites, museums and their storage facilities, public libraries and manuscript repositories, as well as shelters designated to protect movable cultural assets during armed conflicts.
Thus, protection is not limited to archaeological sites but extends to numerous institutions currently at severe risk. An example is the Umam Documentation and Research organization, located in what is known as Beirut’s southern suburbs. This non-governmental cultural institution aims to preserve Lebanese cultural heritage through documentation, training, and education, specializing in the conservation of historic documents, manuscripts, rare books, and culturally significant assets.
Neglect and Absence of the State
Public sentiment reveals frustration toward the ongoing threats to and destruction of cultural and heritage sites, with Lebanese citizens relying more on international organizations than on the Lebanese state, which is largely absent in fulfilling its duties to its people. However, while this reliance is understandable, it is misplaced, as these organizations cannot replace the state’s full legislative and security apparatus. Furthermore, these international entities lack any executive or enforcement power within Lebanese territory, as direct intervention would infringe on Lebanon’s sovereignty.
In conclusion, the issue of protecting Lebanese cultural heritage, particularly sites like Baalbek, underscores the urgent need for decisive action to shield these treasures from growing military threats. Despite international efforts and appeals from institutions, organizations, and individuals, there is a marked shortfall on the part of the Lebanese government in taking proactive measures to secure these sites, which requires effective planning and implementation of comprehensive local protection measures.
Lebanon’s current circumstances and increasing security challenges place a substantial national responsibility on protecting its heritage. Neglecting this duty risks irreplaceable cultural and human losses. Despite ratifying international protocols, local efforts remain insufficient. The Lebanese state must address this matter with greater seriousness, transparency, and persistence in applying enhanced protection measures as stipulated by the Hague Convention. Furthermore, Lebanon should request that UNESCO’s enhanced protection covers not only archaeological sites but also additional heritage and artifacts located in high-risk areas.
The Lebanese government, along with its administrative and security bodies, bears the responsibility to ensure the security of these sites, refrain from using them for military purposes that could lead to direct attacks and their complete destruction, and work alongside international organizations to keep these sites out of conflict zones, preserving this cultural heritage, which is a part of both Lebanese and global identity.
